Archive for February 3rd, 2012

Labor Participation Rate Hits 29 Year Low With Labor Force Shrinking By 1,200,000 Results in Lower Unemployment Rate of 8.3%–Videos

Posted on February 3, 2012. Filed under: American History, Blogroll, Business, Communications, Economics, Employment, Federal Government Budget, Fiscal Policy, Foreign Policy, government spending, history, Investments, Language, Law, liberty, Life, Links, Macroeconomics, media, Microeconomics, People, Philosophy, Politics, Radio, Raves, Talk Radio, Tax Policy, Taxes, Technology, Unions, Video, War, Wealth, Wisdom | Tags: , , , , , , , |

Pronk Pops Show 61:February 8, 2011

Employment Level 1948-2012

Civilian Labor Force 1948-2012

Labor Participation Rate 1948-2012

Unemployment Level 1948-2012

 Unemployment Rate  1948-2012 U-3

Rep. Mulvaney’s second round of quesitons during JEC hearing on February 7, 2012

Unemployment Drops, but It’s ‘Premature to Do Handstands’

Rick Santelli: Here’s What’s Wrong With the Jobs Number

February 3rd 2012 CNBC Stock Market Squawk Box (January Jobs Report)

January Payroll Numbers Bode Well for Industrial Sector

Part 1 » If the Economy is Getting Better….

Part 2 » If the Economy is Getting Better….

Jeffrey Tucker makes the Case Against the Federal Reserve and the Banking Cartel

Fox News: January 2012 Unemployment

Solid US job growth for start of 2011

Hiring Burst Pushes Jobless Rate Down to 8.3%

Jobless Claims Drop for Fifth Month in a Row

U.S. Payrolls Jump; Jobless Rate Drops

Taleb’s idea on ending the crisis

Mark Levin Talks About Obama Cooking The Books On The Unemployment Rate

Weekly Video Address – We’re Still Not There, Yet

Paul Ryan: Why Did the President’s Policies Fail?

Great Depression key figures

CBO Director: Debt Poses Great Risk If Left Unaddressed

Valdes: “Great jobs number…but debt, growth to weigh on equities”

Wall Street cheers US jobs report

Rep. Campbell (R-CA) speaks during JEC Employment Hearing 2.3.12

Dr. Burgess first round of questions during JEC employment hearing in February

Unemployment Rate Primer

UNDERSTANDING ECONOMICS: UNEMPLOYMENT

The Unemployment Game Show: Are You *Really* Unemployed?

Employment Level

Series Id:           LNS12000000
Seasonally Adjusted
Series title:        (Seas) Employment Level
Labor force status:  Employed
Type of data:        Number in thousands
Age:                 16 years and over
Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Annual
2001 137778 137612 137783 137299 137092 136873 137071 136241 136846 136392 136238 136047
2002 135701 136438 136177 136126 136539 136415 136413 136705 137302 137008 136521 136426
2003 137417(1) 137482 137434 137633 137544 137790 137474 137549 137609 137984 138424 138411
2004 138472(1) 138542 138453 138680 138852 139174 139556 139573 139487 139732 140231 140125
2005 140245(1) 140385 140654 141254 141609 141714 142026 142434 142401 142548 142499 142752
2006 143150(1) 143457 143741 143761 144089 144353 144202 144625 144815 145314 145534 145970
2007 146028(1) 146057 146320 145586 145903 146063 145905 145682 146244 145946 146595 146273
2008 146397(1) 146157 146108 146130 145929 145738 145530 145196 145059 144792 144078 143328
2009 142187(1) 141660 140754 140654 140294 140003 139891 139458 138775 138401 138607 137968
2010 138500(1) 138665 138836 139306 139340 139137 139139 139338 139344 139072 138937 139220
2011 139330(1) 139551 139764 139628 139808 139385 139450 139754 140107 140297 140614 140790
2012 141637(1)
1 : Data affected by changes in population controls.

 

Civilian Labor Force Level

Series Id:           LNS11000000
Seasonally Adjusted
Series title:        (Seas) Civilian Labor Force Level
Labor force status:  Civilian labor force
Type of data:        Number in thousands
Age:                 16 years and over

Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Annual
2001 143800 143701 143924 143569 143318 143357 143654 143284 143989 144086 144240 144305
2002 143883 144653 144481 144725 144938 144808 144803 145009 145552 145314 145041 145066
2003 145937(1) 146100 146022 146474 146500 147056 146485 146445 146530 146716 147000 146729
2004 146842(1) 146709 146944 146850 147065 147460 147692 147564 147415 147793 148162 148059
2005 148029(1) 148364 148391 148926 149261 149238 149432 149779 149954 150001 150065 150030
2006 150214(1) 150641 150813 150881 151069 151354 151377 151716 151662 152041 152406 152732
2007 153144(1) 152983 153051 152435 152670 153041 153054 152749 153414 153183 153835 153918
2008 154075(1) 153648 153925 153761 154325 154316 154480 154646 154559 154875 154622 154626
2009 154236(1) 154521 154143 154450 154800 154730 154538 154319 153786 153822 153833 153091
2010 153454(1) 153704 153964 154528 154216 153653 153748 154073 153918 153709 154041 153613
2011 153250(1) 153302 153392 153420 153700 153409 153358 153674 154004 154057 153937 153887
2012 154395(1)
1 : Data affected by changes in population controls.

Labor Force Participation Rate

Series Id:           LNS11300000
Seasonally Adjusted
Series title:        (Seas) Labor Force Participation Rate
Labor force status:  Civilian labor force participation rate
Type of data:        Percent or rate
Age:                 16 years and over

Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Annual
1980 64.0 64.0 63.7 63.8 63.9 63.7 63.8 63.7 63.6 63.7 63.8 63.6
1981 63.9 63.9 64.1 64.2 64.3 63.7 63.8 63.8 63.5 63.8 63.9 63.6
1982 63.7 63.8 63.8 63.9 64.2 63.9 64.0 64.1 64.1 64.1 64.2 64.1
1983 63.9 63.8 63.7 63.8 63.7 64.3 64.1 64.3 64.3 64.0 64.1 64.1
1984 63.9 64.1 64.1 64.3 64.5 64.6 64.6 64.4 64.4 64.4 64.5 64.6
1985 64.7 64.7 64.9 64.9 64.8 64.6 64.7 64.6 64.9 65.0 64.9 65.0
1986 64.9 65.0 65.1 65.1 65.2 65.4 65.4 65.3 65.4 65.4 65.4 65.3
1987 65.4 65.5 65.5 65.4 65.7 65.5 65.6 65.7 65.5 65.7 65.7 65.7
1988 65.8 65.9 65.7 65.8 65.7 65.8 65.9 66.1 65.9 66.0 66.2 66.1
1989 66.5 66.3 66.3 66.4 66.3 66.5 66.5 66.5 66.4 66.5 66.6 66.5
1990 66.8 66.7 66.7 66.6 66.6 66.4 66.5 66.5 66.4 66.4 66.4 66.4
1991 66.2 66.2 66.3 66.4 66.2 66.2 66.1 66.0 66.2 66.1 66.1 66.0
1992 66.3 66.2 66.4 66.5 66.6 66.7 66.7 66.6 66.5 66.2 66.3 66.3
1993 66.2 66.2 66.2 66.1 66.4 66.5 66.4 66.4 66.2 66.3 66.3 66.4
1994 66.6 66.6 66.5 66.5 66.6 66.4 66.4 66.6 66.6 66.7 66.7 66.7
1995 66.8 66.8 66.7 66.9 66.5 66.5 66.6 66.6 66.6 66.6 66.5 66.4
1996 66.4 66.6 66.6 66.7 66.7 66.7 66.9 66.7 66.9 67.0 67.0 67.0
1997 67.0 66.9 67.1 67.1 67.1 67.1 67.2 67.2 67.1 67.1 67.2 67.2
1998 67.1 67.1 67.1 67.0 67.0 67.0 67.0 67.0 67.2 67.2 67.1 67.2
1999 67.2 67.2 67.0 67.1 67.1 67.1 67.1 67.0 67.0 67.0 67.1 67.1
2000 67.3 67.3 67.3 67.3 67.1 67.1 66.9 66.9 66.9 66.8 66.9 67.0
2001 67.2 67.1 67.2 66.9 66.7 66.7 66.8 66.5 66.8 66.7 66.7 66.7
2002 66.5 66.8 66.6 66.7 66.7 66.6 66.5 66.6 66.7 66.6 66.4 66.3
2003 66.4 66.4 66.3 66.4 66.4 66.5 66.2 66.1 66.1 66.1 66.1 65.9
2004 66.1 66.0 66.0 65.9 66.0 66.1 66.1 66.0 65.8 65.9 66.0 65.9
2005 65.8 65.9 65.9 66.1 66.1 66.1 66.1 66.2 66.1 66.1 66.0 66.0
2006 66.0 66.1 66.2 66.1 66.1 66.2 66.1 66.2 66.1 66.2 66.3 66.4
2007 66.4 66.3 66.2 65.9 66.0 66.0 66.0 65.8 66.0 65.8 66.0 66.0
2008 66.2 66.0 66.1 65.9 66.1 66.1 66.1 66.1 65.9 66.0 65.8 65.8
2009 65.7 65.8 65.6 65.6 65.7 65.7 65.5 65.4 65.1 65.0 65.0 64.6
2010 64.8 64.9 64.9 65.1 64.9 64.6 64.6 64.7 64.6 64.4 64.5 64.3
2011 64.2 64.2 64.2 64.2 64.2 64.1 64.0 64.1 64.1 64.1 64.0 64.0
2012 63.7

Unemployment Level

Series Id:           LNS13000000
Seasonally Adjusted
Series title:        (Seas) Unemployment Level
Labor force status:  Unemployed
Type of data:        Number in thousands
Age:                 16 years and over


 
Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Annual
2001 6023 6089 6141 6271 6226 6484 6583 7042 7142 7694 8003 8258
2002 8182 8215 8304 8599 8399 8393 8390 8304 8251 8307 8520 8640
2003 8520 8618 8588 8842 8957 9266 9011 8896 8921 8732 8576 8317
2004 8370 8167 8491 8170 8212 8286 8136 7990 7927 8061 7932 7934
2005 7784 7980 7737 7672 7651 7524 7406 7345 7553 7453 7566 7279
2006 7064 7184 7072 7120 6980 7001 7175 7091 6847 6727 6872 6762
2007 7116 6927 6731 6850 6766 6979 7149 7067 7170 7237 7240 7645
2008 7678 7491 7816 7631 8395 8578 8950 9450 9501 10083 10544 11299
2009 12049 12860 13389 13796 14505 14727 14646 14861 15012 15421 15227 15124
2010 14953 15039 15128 15221 14876 14517 14609 14735 14574 14636 15104 14393
2011 13919 13751 13628 13792 13892 14024 13908 13920 13897 13759 13323 13097
2012 12758


Unemployment Rate U-3

Series Id:           LNS14000000 Seasonally Adjusted

Series title:        (Seas) Unemployment Rate

Labor force status:  Unemployment rate

Type of data:        Percent or rate

Age:                 16 years and over

Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Annual
2001 4.2 4.2 4.3 4.4 4.3 4.5 4.6 4.9 5.0 5.3 5.5 5.7
2002 5.7 5.7 5.7 5.9 5.8 5.8 5.8 5.7 5.7 5.7 5.9 6.0
2003 5.8 5.9 5.9 6.0 6.1 6.3 6.2 6.1 6.1 6.0 5.8 5.7
2004 5.7 5.6 5.8 5.6 5.6 5.6 5.5 5.4 5.4 5.5 5.4 5.4
2005 5.3 5.4 5.2 5.2 5.1 5.0 5.0 4.9 5.0 5.0 5.0 4.9
2006 4.7 4.8 4.7 4.7 4.6 4.6 4.7 4.7 4.5 4.4 4.5 4.4
2007 4.6 4.5 4.4 4.5 4.4 4.6 4.7 4.6 4.7 4.7 4.7 5.0
2008 5.0 4.9 5.1 5.0 5.4 5.6 5.8 6.1 6.1 6.5 6.8 7.3
2009 7.8 8.3 8.7 8.9 9.4 9.5 9.5 9.6 9.8 10.0 9.9 9.9
2010 9.7 9.8 9.8 9.9 9.6 9.4 9.5 9.6 9.5 9.5 9.8 9.4
2011 9.1 9.0 8.9 9.0 9.0 9.1 9.1 9.1 9.0 8.9 8.7 8.5
2012 8.3

Total Unemployment Rate U-6

 Series Id:           LNS13327709
Seasonally Adjusted
Series title:        (seas) Total unemployed, plus all marginally attached workers plus total employed
 part time for economic reasons, as a percent of all civilian labor force plus all marginally attached
workers
Labor force status:  Aggregated totals unemployed
Type of data:        Percent or rate
Age:                 16 years and over
Percent/rates:       Unemployed and mrg attached and pt for econ reas as percent of labor force plus marg attached

Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Annual
2001 7.3 7.4 7.3 7.4 7.5 7.9 7.8 8.1 8.7 9.3 9.4 9.6
2002 9.5 9.5 9.4 9.7 9.5 9.5 9.6 9.6 9.6 9.6 9.7 9.8
2003 10.0 10.2 10.0 10.2 10.1 10.3 10.3 10.1 10.4 10.2 10.0 9.8
2004 9.9 9.7 10.0 9.6 9.6 9.5 9.5 9.4 9.4 9.7 9.4 9.2
2005 9.3 9.3 9.1 8.9 8.9 9.0 8.8 8.9 9.0 8.7 8.7 8.6
2006 8.4 8.4 8.2 8.1 8.2 8.4 8.5 8.4 8.0 8.2 8.1 7.9
2007 8.4 8.2 8.0 8.2 8.2 8.3 8.4 8.4 8.4 8.4 8.4 8.8
2008 9.2 9.0 9.1 9.2 9.7 10.1 10.5 10.8 11.1 11.8 12.7 13.5
2009 14.2 15.1 15.7 15.8 16.4 16.5 16.5 16.7 16.8 17.2 17.1 17.1
2010 16.7 16.9 16.9 17.0 16.6 16.5 16.5 16.6 16.9 16.8 16.9 16.6
2011 16.1 15.9 15.7 15.9 15.8 16.2 16.1 16.2 16.4 16.0 15.6 15.2
2012 15.1


Unemployment Rate 16-19 Year Olds

Series Id:           LNS14000012
Seasonally Adjusted
Series title:        (Seas) Unemployment Rate – 16-19 yrs.
Labor force status:  Unemployment rate
Type of data:        Percent or rate
Age:                 16 to 19 years

Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Annual
2001 13.8 13.7 13.8 13.9 13.4 14.2 14.4 15.6 15.2 16.0 15.9 17.0
2002 16.5 16.0 16.6 16.7 16.6 16.7 16.8 17.0 16.3 15.1 17.1 16.9
2003 17.2 17.2 17.8 17.7 17.9 19.0 18.2 16.6 17.6 17.2 15.7 16.2
2004 17.0 16.5 16.8 16.6 17.1 17.0 17.8 16.7 16.6 17.4 16.4 17.6
2005 16.2 17.5 17.1 17.8 17.8 16.3 16.1 16.1 15.5 16.1 17.0 14.9
2006 15.1 15.3 16.1 14.6 14.0 15.8 15.9 16.0 16.3 15.2 14.8 14.6
2007 14.8 14.9 14.9 15.9 15.9 16.3 15.3 15.9 15.9 15.4 16.2 16.8
2008 17.7 16.7 16.1 15.9 19.0 19.2 20.7 18.6 19.1 19.9 20.3 20.6
2009 20.7 22.2 22.2 22.3 23.4 24.7 24.3 25.1 25.9 27.0 26.8 26.7
2010 25.9 25.4 26.2 25.7 26.7 25.9 25.9 25.8 25.8 27.0 24.5 25.2
2011 25.4 23.9 24.5 24.9 24.1 24.6 24.9 25.3 24.5 24.0 23.7 23.1
2012 23.2

Pronk Pops Show 61:February 8, 2011

Background Articles and Videos

 

Current Population Survey

 

 

Employment Situation Summary

Transmission of material in this release is embargoed                 USDL-12-0163
until 8:30 a.m. (EST) Friday, February 3, 2012

Technical information:
 Household data:     (202) 691-6378  *  cpsinfo@bls.gov  *  www.bls.gov/cps
 Establishment data: (202) 691-6555  *  cesinfo@bls.gov  *  www.bls.gov/ces

Media contact:       (202) 691-5902  *  PressOffice@bls.gov

                THE EMPLOYMENT SITUATION -- JANUARY 2012

Total nonfarm payroll employment rose by 243,000 in January, and the
unemployment rate decreased to 8.3 percent, the U.S. Bureau of Labor
Statistics reported today. Job growth was widespread in the private
sector, with large employment gains in professional and business
services, leisure and hospitality, and manufacturing. Government
employment changed little over the month.

   -----------------------------------------------------------------
  |                                                                 |
  |            Changes to The Employment Situation Data             |
  |                                                                 |
  |Establishment survey data have been revised as a result of the   |
  |annual benchmarking process and the updating of seasonal         |
  |adjustment factors. Also, household survey data for January 2012 |
  |reflect updated population estimates. See the notes at the end of|
  |the news release for more information about these changes.       |
  |                                                                 |
   ----------------------------------------------------------------- 

Household Survey Data

The unemployment rate declined by 0.2 percentage point in January to
8.3 percent; the rate has fallen by 0.8 point since August. (See table
A-1.) The number of unemployed persons declined to 12.8 million in
January. (See the note and tables B and C for information about annual
population adjustments to the household survey estimates.)

Among the major worker groups, the unemployment rates for adult men
(7.7 percent) and blacks (13.6 percent) declined in January. The
unemployment rates for adult women (7.7 percent), teenagers (23.2
percent), whites (7.4 percent), and Hispanics (10.5 percent) were
little changed. The jobless rate for Asians was 6.7 percent, not
seasonally adjusted. (See tables A-1, A-2, and A-3.)

In January, the number of job losers and persons who completed
temporary jobs fell to 7.3 million. The number of long-term unemployed
(those jobless for 27 weeks or more) was little changed at 5.5 million
and accounted for 42.9 percent of the unemployed. (See tables A-11 and
A-12.)

After accounting for the annual adjustments to the population
controls, the employment-population ratio (58.5 percent) rose in
January, while the civilian labor force participation rate held at
63.7 percent. (See table A-1. For additional information about the
effects of the population adjustments, see table C.)

The number of persons employed part time for economic reasons, at 8.2
million, changed little in January. These individuals were working
part time because their hours had been cut back or because they were
unable to find a full-time job. (See table A-8.)

In January, 2.8 million persons were marginally attached to the labor
force, essentially unchanged from a year earlier. (The data are not
seasonally adjusted.) These individuals were not in the labor force,
wanted and were available for work, and had looked for a job sometime
in the prior 12 months. They were not counted as unemployed because
they had not searched for work in the 4 weeks preceding the survey.
(See table A-16.)

Among the marginally attached, there were 1.1 million discouraged
workers in January, little different from a year earlier. (The data
are not seasonally adjusted.) Discouraged workers are persons not
currently looking for work because they believe no jobs are available
for them. The remaining 1.7 million persons marginally attached to the
labor force in January had not searched for work in the 4 weeks
preceding the survey for reasons such as school attendance or family
responsibilities. (See table A-16.)

Establishment Survey Data

Total nonfarm payroll employment rose by 243,000 in January. Private-
sector employment grew by 257,000, with the largest employment gains
in professional and business services, leisure and hospitality, and
manufacturing. Government employment was little changed over the
month. (See table B-1.)

Professional and business services continued to add jobs in January
(+70,000). About half of the increase occurred in employment services
(+33,000). Job gains also occurred in accounting and bookkeeping
(+13,000) and in architectural and engineering services (+7,000).

Over the month, employment in leisure and hospitality increased by
44,000, primarily in food services and drinking places (+33,000).
Since a recent low in February 2010, food services has added 487,000
jobs.

In January, health care employment continued to grow (+31,000). Within
the industry, hospitals and ambulatory care services each added 13,000
jobs.

Wholesale trade employment increased by 14,000 over the month. Since a
recent employment low in May 2010, wholesale trade has added 144,000
jobs.

Employment in retail trade continued to trend up in January. Job gains
in department stores (+19,000), health and personal care stores
(+7,000), and automobile dealers (+7,000) were partially offset by
losses in clothing and clothing accessory stores (-14,000). Since an
employment trough in December 2009, retail trade has added 390,000
jobs.

In January, employment in information declined by 13,000, including a
loss of 8,000 jobs in the motion picture and sound recording industry.

In the goods-producing sector, manufacturing added 50,000 jobs. Nearly
all of the increase occurred in durable goods manufacturing, with job
growth in fabricated metal products (+11,000), machinery (+11,000),
and motor vehicles and parts (+8,000). Durable goods manufacturing has
added 418,000 jobs over the past 2 years.

Employment in construction increased by 21,000 in January, following a
gain of 31,000 in the previous month. Over the past 2 months,
nonresidential specialty trade contractors added 30,000 jobs.

Mining added 10,000 jobs in January, with most of the gain in support
activities for mining (+8,000). Since a recent low in October 2009,
mining employment has expanded by 172,000.

Government employment changed little in January. Over the past 12
months, the sector has lost 276,000 jobs, with declines in local
government; state government, excluding education; and the U.S. Postal
Service.

The average workweek for all employees on private nonfarm payrolls was
unchanged in January. The manufacturing workweek increased by 0.3 hour
to 40.9 hours, and factory overtime increased by 0.1 hour to 3.4
hours. The average workweek for production and nonsupervisory
employees on private nonfarm payrolls edged up by 0.1 hour to 33.8
hours. (See tables B-2 and B-7.)

In January, average hourly earnings for all employees on private
nonfarm payrolls rose by 4 cents, or 0.2 percent, to $23.29. Over the
past 12 months, average hourly earnings have increased by 1.9 percent.
In January, average hourly earnings of private-sector production and
nonsupervisory employees edged up by 2 cents, or 0.1 percent, to
$19.62. (See tables B-3 and B-8.)

The change in total nonfarm payroll employment for November was
revised from +100,000 to +157,000, and the change for December was
revised from +200,000 to +203,000. Monthly revisions result from
additional sample reports and the monthly recalculation of seasonal
factors. The annual benchmark process also contributed to these
revisions.

____________
The Employment Situation for February is scheduled to be released on
Friday, March 9, 2012, at 8:30 a.m. (EST).

   -----------------------------------------------------------------
  |                                                                 |
  |                 Changes to the Household Survey                 |
  |                                                                 |
  |Effective with the collection of household survey data for       |
  |January 2012, the questions on race and Hispanic or Latino       |
  |ethnicity were modified to incorporate minor wording changes.    |
  |                                                                 |
  |In January 2012, the Census Bureau, which conducts the household |
  |survey, began a year-long process of reorganizing its regional   |
  |office structure; for more information on these changes see      |
  |www.census.gov/newsroom/pdf/General_QAs_FINAL2.pdf. Both the     |
  |Census Bureau and the Bureau of Labor Statistics will monitor    |
  |survey operations during the transition period. No impact on the |
  |employment and unemployment estimates from the survey is         |
  |anticipated from this organizational change.                     |
  |                                                                 |
   ----------------------------------------------------------------- 

                  Revisions to Establishment Survey Data

  In accordance with annual practice, the establishment survey data
  released today have been revised to reflect comprehensive counts of
  payroll jobs, or benchmarks. These counts are derived principally from
  unemployment insurance tax records for March 2011. In addition, the
  data were updated to the 2012 North American Industry Classification
  System (NAICS) from the 2007 NAICS. This update resulted in minor
  changes to several detailed industries. The benchmark process resulted
  in revisions to not seasonally adjusted data from April 2010 forward
  and to seasonally adjusted data from January 2007 forward. Some
  historical data predating the normal benchmark revision period also
  were revised due to the implementation of NAICS 2012 and other minor
  changes related to rounding and the recalculation of aggregate series.

  Table A presents revised total nonfarm employment data on a seasonally
  adjusted basis for January through December 2011. The revised data for
  April 2011 forward incorporate the effect of applying the rate of
  change measured by the sample to the new benchmark level, as well as
  updated net business birth/death model adjustments and new seasonal
  adjustment factors. The November and December 2011 data also reflect
  the routine incorporation of additional sample receipts into the
  November final and December second preliminary estimates. The total
  nonfarm employment level for March 2011 was revised upward by 165,000
  (162,000 on a not seasonally adjusted basis). The previously published
  level for December 2011 was revised upward by 266,000 (231,000 on a
  not seasonally adjusted basis).

  An article that discusses the benchmark and post-benchmark revisions,
  the change to NAICS 2012, and the other technical issues, as well as
  all revised historical Current Employment Statistics (CES) data, can
  be accessed through the CES homepage at www.bls.gov/ces/. Information
  on the revisions released today also may be obtained by calling (202)
  691-6555.

    Table A. Revisions in total nonfarm employment, January-December 2011,
    seasonally adjusted                                                    

    (Numbers in thousands)
    ___________________________________________________________________________________
                   |                                 |                     	       |
                   |              Level              |    Over-the-month change        |
                   |---------------------------------|---------------------------------|
     Year and month|    As    |          |           |    As    |          |           |
                   |previously|    As    | Difference|previously|    As    | Difference|
                   |published |  revised |           |published |  revised |           |
    _______________|__________|__________|___________|__________|__________|___________|
                   |          |          |           |          |          |           |
         2011      |          |          |           |          |          |           |
         	   |          |	         |	     |	        |	   |           |
    January........|  130,328 | 130,456  |   128     |    68    |   110    |    42     |
    February.......|  130,563 | 130,676  |   113     |   235    |   220    |   -15     |
    March..........|  130,757 | 130,922  |   165     |   194    |   246    |    52     |
    April..........|  130,974 | 131,173  |   199     |   217    |   251    |    34     |
    May............|  131,027 | 131,227  |   200     |    53    |    54    |     1     |
    June...........|  131,047 | 131,311  |   264     |    20    |    84    |    64     |
    July...........|  131,174 | 131,407  |   233     |   127    |    96    |   -31     |
    August.........|  131,278 | 131,492  |   214     |   104    |    85    |   -19     |
    September......|  131,488 | 131,694  |   206     |   210    |   202    |    -8     |
    October........|  131,600 | 131,806  |   206     |   112    |   112    |     0     |
    November.......|  131,700 | 131,963  |   263     |   100    |   157    |    57     |
    December (p)...|  131,900 | 132,166  |   266     |   200    |   203    |     3     |
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
     p = preliminary.

        Adjustments to Population Estimates for the Household Survey

  Effective with data for January 2012, updated population estimates
 which reflect the results of Census 2010 have been used in the
 household survey. Population estimates for the household survey are
  developed by the U.S. Census Bureau. Each year, the Census Bureau
  updates the estimates to reflect new information and assumptions about
  the growth of the population during the decade. The change in
  population reflected in the new estimates results from the
  introduction of the Census 2010 count as the new population base,
  adjustments for net international migration, updated vital statistics and
  other information, and some methodological changes in the estimation
  process. The vast majority of the population change, however, is due
  to the change in base population from Census 2000 to Census 2010.

  In accordance with usual practice, BLS will not revise the official
  household survey estimates for December 2011 and earlier months. To
  show the impact of the population adjustment, however, differences in
  selected December 2011 labor force series based on the old and new
  population estimates are shown in table B.

  The adjustment increased the estimated size of the civilian
  noninstitutional population in December by 1,510,000, the civilian
  labor force by 258,000, employment by 216,000, unemployment by 42,000,
  and persons not in the labor force by 1,252,000. Although the total
  unemployment rate was unaffected, the labor force participation rate
  and the employment-population ratio were each reduced by 0.3
  percentage point. This was because the population increase was
  primarily among persons 55 and older and, to a lesser degree, persons
  16 to 24 years of age. Both these age groups have lower levels of
  labor force participation than the general population.

  Data users are cautioned that these annual population adjustments
  affect the comparability of household data series over time. Table C
  shows the effect of the introduction of new population estimates on
  the comparison of selected labor force measures between December 2011 and
  January 2012. Additional information on the population adjustments and
  their effect on national labor force estimates is available at
  www.bls.gov/cps/cps12adj.pdf.

  Table B. Effect of the updated population controls on December 2011 estimates by sex, race, and Hispanic or Latino ethnicity, not seasonally adjusted 
  (Numbers in thousands)                                                      

  _____________________________________________________________________________________________________
                                              |      |     |      |       |        |       |
                                              |      |     |      |       |  Black |       |
                                              |      |     |      |       |    or  |       |  Hispanic
                  Category                    |Total | Men | Women| White | African| Asian | or Latino
                                              |      |     |      |       |American|       | ethnicity
                                              |      |     |      |       |        |       |
  ____________________________________________|______|_____|______|_______|________|_______|___________
   					      |	     |	   |	  |	  |	   |	   |
  Civilian noninstitutional population........| 1,510| -116| 1,626| -1,181|     407|  1,161|   1,330
    Civilian labor force......................|   258| -413|   671| -1,385|     166|    731|     781
      Participation rate......................|   -.3|  -.3|   -.2|    -.3|     -.3|    -.2|     -.3
     Employed.................................|   216| -368|   584| -1,266|     165|    676|     675
      Employment-population ratio.............|   -.3|  -.3|   -.2|    -.3|     -.2|    -.2|     -.3
     Unemployed...............................|    42|  -45|    87|   -119|       2|     55|     106
      Unemployment rate.......................|    .0|   .0|    .0|     .0|     -.1|     .1|      .1
    Not in labor force........................| 1,252|  297|   955|    205|     240|    430|     550
  ____________________________________________|______|_____|______|_______|________|_______|___________

   NOTE:  Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding. Estimates for the above race groups (white,
 black or African American, and Asian) do not sum to totals because data are not presented for all races.
 Persons whose ethnicity is identified as Hispanic or Latino may be of any race.           

  Table C. December 2011-January 2012 changes in selected labor force measures, with adjustments for population control effects                

  (Numbers in thousands)                                                      

  ____________________________________________________________________________
                                       |           |            |
                                       |           |            |  Dec.-Jan.
                                       | Dec.-Jan. |    2012    |   change,
                                       |  change,  | population |  after re-
                Category               |    as     |   control  |  moving the
                                       | published |   effect   |  population
                                       |           |            |   control
                                       |           |            |  effect(1)
  _____________________________________|___________|____________|_____________
                                       |           |            |
  Civilian noninstitutional population.|  1,685    |      1,510 |     175
    Civilian labor force...............|    508    |        258 |     250
      Participation rate...............|    -.3    |        -.3 |      .0
     Employed..........................|    847    |        216 |     631
      Employment-population ratio......|     .0    |        -.3 |      .3
     Unemployed........................|   -339    |         42 |    -381
      Unemployment rate................|    -.2    |         .0 |     -.2
    Not in labor force.................| 1,177 | 1,252| -75   _____________________________________|___________|____________|_____________

    (1) This Dec.-Jan. change is calculated by subtracting the population
  control effect from the over-the-month change in the published seasonally
  adjusted estimates.
Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

Florida GOP Commits Delegate Fraud By Violating National Republican Party Rule 15(b)(2) In Awarding Romney All 50 State Delegates–Gingrich, Santorum and Paul Expected To Challege Winner Take All Scheme–Demands Proportional Awarding of Delegates–Videos

Posted on February 3, 2012. Filed under: Blogroll, College, Communications, Economics, Education, Employment, Foreign Policy, government, government spending, Language, Law, liberty, Life, Links, media, People, Philosophy, Politics, Psychology, Public Sector, Radio, Raves, Regulations, Unions, Wealth, Wisdom | Tags: , , , , , , , , , |

Peter Frampton –  Breaking All The Rules

Florida Bucks GOP Rule, Changes Primary Date

The Rules of the Republican Party

RULE No. 15

Election, Selection, Allocation, or Binding of
Delegates and Alternate Delegates

Rule  15(b)(2)

“Any presidential primary, caucus, convention, or other meeting held for the purpose of selecting delegates to the national convention which occurs prior to the first day of April in the year in which the national convention is held, shall provide for the allocation of delegates on a proportional basis.”

RULE NO. 16

Enforcement of Rules

Rule 16 (a)

“If any state or state Republican Party violates The Rules of the Republican Party relating to 25 of 41 the timing of the election or selection process with the result that any delegate from that state to the national convention is bound by statute or rule to vote for a presidential nominee selected or determined before the first day of the month in which that state is authorized by Rule No. 15(b) to vote for a presidential candidate and/or elect, select, allocate, or bind delegates or alternate delegates to the national convention, the number of delegates to the national convention from that state shall be reduced by fifty percent (50%), and the corresponding alternate delegates also shall be reduced by the same percentage. Any sum presenting a fraction shall be increased to the next whole number. No delegation shall be reduced to less than two (2) delegates and a corresponding number of alternates.”

Gingrich Hits Romney After Losing Florida Primary

Jumpin’ Jack Flash (The Rolling Stones – Introduced by John Lennon in sign language!

Watch it!

I was born in a cross-fire hurricane

And I howled at my ma in the driving rain,
But it’s all right now, in fact, it’s a gas!
But it’s all right. I’m Jumpin’ Jack Flash,
It’s a Gas!  Gas!  Gas!

I was raised by a toothless, bearded hag,
I was schooled with a strap right across my back,
But it’s all right now, in fact, it’s a gas!
But it’s all right, I’m Jumpin’ Jack Flash,
It’s a Gas!  Gas!  Gas!

I was drowned, I was washed up and left for dead.
I fell down to my feet and I saw they bled.
I frowned at the crumbs of a crust of bread.
Yeah, yeah, yeah
I was crowned with a spike right thru my head.
But it’s all right now, in fact, it’s a gas!
But it’s all right, I’m Jumpin’ Jack Flash,
It’s a Gas!  Gas!  Gas!

Jumping Jack Flash, its a gas
Jumping Jack Flash, its a gas
Jumping Jack Flash, its a gas
Jumping Jack Flash, its a gas

The Rules of the Republican Party

As Adopted by the 2008 Republican National Convention September 1, 2008

*Amended by the Republican National Committee on August 6, 2010

https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q=cache:_dnqoddvM7MJ:www.gop.com/images/legal/2008_RULES_Adopted.pdf+Rule+15(b)(2)+Republican+Party+Delegates&hl=en&gl=us&pid=bl&srcid=ADGEESirY4V8q_UXAzwMavBQ5_F8PWLJXp_A4k0jyiYVqCVSB5eOyBGOPSIpz1ZtSNFy8AUPM_Fj6iGB5on5DQSqfhan4SfSGxcVq6mBz6Bna3js3SmaUqUice_tW6eUvvmd7DPvxYB_&sig=AHIEtbR-zTsFqrT0sPJQu8v-P-vMl7zDVw

Florida May Not Be Committing Voter Fraud But They Sure Are Committing Delegate Fraud

Republican National Committee Approves 2012 Presidential Nominating Process

“…The Republican National Committee (RNC) approved the Temporary Delegate  Selection Committee’s proposed amendment to Rule No. 15(b) amending the 2012  presidential nominating process.

Republican National Committee Chairman Michael Steele praised the adoption of  the new amendment. “The decision by more than two-thirds of the Committee will  put our presidential nominating process on the right track and ensure that we  emerge from the primaries with the strongest Republican nominee possible to  defeat Barack Obama,” said Chairman Steele.

Revised Rule  No. 15(b) as Amended by the Temporary Delegate Selection Committee  Proposal

Rule No. 15: Election, Selection,  Allocation, or Binding of Delegates and Alternate Delegates

(b) Timing.

(1) No primary, caucus, or convention to elect,  select, allocate, or bind delegates to the national convention shall occur prior  to the first Tuesday in March in the year in which a national convention is  held.  Except Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina, and Nevada may begin  their processes at any time on or after February 1 in the year in which  a national convention is held and shall not be subject to the  provisions of paragraph (b)(2) of this rule.

(2) Any presidential primary, caucus, convention,  or other meeting held for the purpose of selecting delegates to the national  convention which occurs prior to the first day of April in the year in which the  national convention is held, shall provide for the allocation of delegates on a  proportional basis.

(3) If the Democratic National Committee fails to  adhere to a presidential primary schedule with the dates set forth in Rule  15(b)(1) of these Rules (February 1 and first Tuesday in March), then Rule 15(b)  shall revert to the Rules as adopted by the 2008 Republican National  Convention.

Read more: http://www.gop.com/index.php/news/comments/republican_national_committee_approves_2012_presidential_nominating_process#ixzz1lKZLNXij

Gingrich memo on Florida delegate allocation

“…The essence of the issue is as follows: The Florida primary, which was binding, was held on January 31, 2012. This primary was held 60 days prior to the winner-take-all allowable date of April 1, 2012, as set by RNC Rules of the Republican Party.

August 6, 2010, which states: Any presidential primary, caucus, convention, or other meeting held for the purpose of selecting delegates to the national convention which occurs prior to the first day of April in the year in which the national convention is held, shall provide for the allocation of delegates on a proportional basis.

 Rule 16 then imposes penalties upon any unauthorized state which chooses to violate Rule 15(b) by holding binding primaries or caucuses prior to April 1, 2012. These penalties include a fifty percent reduction in the number of delegates and a prohibition against RNC members from the state serving as delegates or alternate delegates to the convention. Left unclear in the interaction of Rules 15(b)(2) and 16 is whether the RNC is required to impose proportional allocation of delegates for any state, such as Florida, which elected to violate the mandate that all binding primaries and caucuses held before April 1,

 straightforward language of Revised Rule 15(b)(2) would appear to indicate that proportional allocation in Florida is mandatory upon the RNC.

http://www.foxnews.com/interactive/politics/2012/02/01/gingrich-memo-on-florida-delegate-allocation/

Fla’s GOP delegates: Should it be 50 for Romney? Or 23 for Romney, 16 for Gingrich?

“…It only takes a registered Florida voter to file a challenge to Florida’s delegation and the RNC’s contest committee will take it up a week before the convention in August. Marc Cross, an Osceola state committeeman and Ron Paul supporter, months ago complained to the RNC about the winner-take-all question. Now Fox News reports that the Gingrich campaign is likely to encourage a challenge as well.

Here’s the memo from the Gingrich camp.

And here’s the RNC’s memo on the topic out today: …”

MEMORANDUM

TO:  RNC MEMBERS

FROM: BILL CROCKER, GENERAL COUNSEL    JOHN RYDER, CHAIRMAN, PRESIDENTIAL NOMINATING SCHEDULE                    COMMITTEE

RE: FLORIDA DELEGATION TO THE NATIONAL CONVENTION

DATE: FEBRUARY 1, 2012 ________________________________________________________________________

This memo is written to address some questions that have arisen regarding whether or not the Republican Party of Florida can send a delegation to the National Convention chosen pursuant to a winner-take-all rule, and the proper procedure to raise and address such questions.

At the 2008 Republican National Convention, the delegates approved Rule 10(d), which created a temporary delegate selection committee with the limited authority “to review the timing of the election, selection, allocation, or binding of delegates or alternate delegates pursuant to Rule No. 15(b)” and to make recommendations regarding such timing to the full RNC, which could adopt the committee’s proposal by a two-thirds vote.  The amended Rule 15(b) that was recommended by the committee and adopted by the RNC created three timing windows establishing the earliest dates on which states could hold primaries or caucuses to elect, select, allocate or bind delegates to the national convention:

No primary, caucus, or convention to elect, select, allocate, or bind delegates to the national convention shall occur prior to the first Tuesday in March in the year in which the national convention is held.  Except, Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina, and Nevada may begin their processes at any time on or after February 1 in the year in which the national convention is held and shall not be subject to the provisions of paragraph (b)(2) of this rule. (Rule No. 15(b)(1))

Any presidential primary, caucus, convention, or other meeting held for the purpose of selecting delegates to the national convention which occurs prior to the first day of April in the year in which the national convention is held, shall provide for the allocation of delegates on a proportional basis. (Rule No. 15(b)(2))

By holding its primary on January 31, Florida has violated Rule 15(b).  Like the other states in violation, Florida is suffering the mandatory penalties under Rule 16: loss of fifty percent of its delegates and alternates, and the RNC members from Florida cannot serve as delegates.  In addition, the RNC Rules Committee imposed every available discretionary penalty – penalties related to convention seating, guest privileges and hotel location.  Thus, all of the penalties authorized under the Rules have been imposed on Florida.

With regard to proportionality, the RNC does not have the authority to intervene in a state’s primary plans beyond the imposition of the Rule 16 penalties.  A contest procedure exists for challenges to a state’s delegation or delegates.  The RNC cannot consider any issue regarding Florida’s delegation unless and until a proper contest is brought.  If a contest is properly and timely filed, the Committee on Contests and the RNC will have the opportunity to hear the contest and determine if there are any further steps to be taken beyond the penalties that have already been imposed.

We hope you find this information helpful in clearing up some of the questions that have been raised regarding the Florida primary.

http://www.tampabay.com/blogs/the-buzz-florida-politics/content/flas-gop-delegates-should-it-be-50-romney-or-23-romney-16-gingrich

GOP Scandal: Florida Violated Another Rule?

“…Most of you will remember that Florida, by moving its primary up to January, waived half of its delegates to the national convention.  As it now turns out, they may have violated another rule, and it stands to benefit Newt Gingrich, Rick Santorum, and Ron Paul, all to the detriment of Mitt Romney.  It seems that there is another rule that forbids “winner-take-all” primaries and caucuses prior to 1 April.  This is being covered by a variety of outlets, but Burns and Haberman at Politico have given in-depth coverage.

They have outlined the problem, and actually quoted the GOP rules:

“Any presidential primary, caucus, convention, or other meeting held for the purpose of selecting delegates to the national convention which occurs prior to the first day of April in the year in which the national convention is held, shall provide for the allocation of delegates on a proportional basis. (Rule No. 15(b)(2))” (emphasis mine)

Uh-oh Mitt. You see, if we are to accept that the Virginia GOP mustn’t change its rules to permit others who just missed qualification for the ballot access in that state, we must also conclude since the GOP is a party that follows its own rules, it must follow this one.  I have read accounts that the Gingrich camp is already pursuing this, as they should because as the Romney camp  hurries to remind us about Virginia, “rules are rules.”

http://markamerica.com/2012/02/02/gop-scandal-florida-violated-another-rule/

Gingrich to challenge Florida’s “winner take all” rule, demand proportional award of delegates

“…He’s got a case, I think. Simple rule: Every state that goes before April 1 is required to award its delegates proportionally. Florida was supposed to go after that date but moved up its primary in defiance of the RNC’s wishes. They were penalized by having half of their 99 delegates taken away — but for some reason, their “winner take all” rule was allowed to remain in effect despite the date change. So Romney ended up with 50 delegates last night while Gingrich got squat.

But maybe not for long:

The Newt Gingrich campaign is gearing up to challenge the results of the Florida Republican presidential primary based on the Republican National Committee’s own rules which state that no contest can be winner-take-all prior to April 1, 2012…

Fox News has learned exclusively that on Thursday, a Florida Gingrich campaign official will begin the process of trying to have the RNC rules enforced so that the Sunshine State delegates are distributed based on the percentage of the vote each candidate got.

RNC Chairman Reince Priebus warned Florida Republican Party Chairman Lenny Curry of the violation in a December letter quoting the rule, “…’winner-take-all’ states cannot hold a primary or caucus before April 1, 2012.”

Newt’s goal here, of course, is to signal to his supporters that he’s in the race for the long haul by scrapping for every available delegate. If Florida used the simplest possible proportional rules instead of “winner take all,” Romney would win 23 delegates from his 46 percent last night and Newt would win 16 — reducing a 50-delegate margin to just seven in one fell swoop. Problem is, the RNC’s already punished Florida once for moving its primary up by taking half its delegates away; if they forced them to go proportional on top of that, it would be an additional sanction. So, to compromise, they could in theory restore all of Florida’s delegates and then award those proportionally. That would mean, obviously, 46 for Mitt and 32 for Newt for a margin of 14. Team Mitt will battle to preserve the current “winner take all” scenario, but as we get closer to the convention, Florida pols will inevitably start demanding that all of the state’s delegates be seated notwithstanding its violation of RNC rules. (The same thing happened in the 2008 Democratic primary between Obama and Hillary, you may remember. Eventually the full Florida delegation was reinstated when the results of the primary became immaterial to Obama’s overall victory.) It’d be hard for the RNC under any circumstances to ignore claims that it’s disenfranchising swing-state Floridians by penalizing the state, but the convention this year is in … Tampa. Good luck telling half the Florida delegation to go home when they already are home. Which means if Mitt and Newt end up battling to the bitter end, the proportional scenario may be the compromise solution. …”

http://hotair.com/archives/2012/02/01/gingrich-to-challenge-floridas-winner-take-all-rule-demand-proportional-award-of-delegates/

Gingrich Challenges Florida’s Winner-Take-All Delegate Scheme

“…From the day Florida announced it  would flout Republican National Committee rules by holding a winner-take-all  primary prior to the permitted April 1 start date, it was predictable that a  loser of that contest was certain to complain.

Now, Newt Gingrich’s campaign has  announced he will complain.

Spokesman R.C. Hammond told  reporters Thursday that the campaign is sending a letter to the Florida  Republican Party asking it to comply with the RNC rules that require contests  held prior to April 1 to allocate delegates  proportionally.

If Florida were to allocate delegates on a  strictly proportional basis, Gingrich would be leading the delegate race right  now.

Gingrich lost the Florida GOP vote  Tuesday to Mitt Romney by 14 percentage points, 46 to 32. Under the  winner-take-all scheme adopted by the state party, Romney would get all 50  delegates, and Gingrich would get nothing. Under a strictly proportional  allocation formula, though, Romney would get only 23 delegates, while Gingrich  would get 16.

Add those to the delegates awarded  in New Hampshire and South Carolina, and  Gingrich would be leading Romney 39 to 32, rather than losing to him 59 to  23.

“The existing rules say that any  contest held before a certain date is awarded delegates proportionally,”  Hammond said. “They held their contest before that certain date. So we’re asking them to  enforce those rules.”

The Florida Republican party wasted  little time making clear what it thought of Gingrich’s proposal, pre-empting the  official request with a denial issued via press release. “All campaigns and the  RNC have known since [September] that Florida  was winner take all,” said Florida party Chairman Lenny Curry. “It is a  shame when the loser of a contest agrees to the rules before, then cries foul  after losing.”

Even if Florida rejects Gingrich’s plea, though, he has the option  of pursuing the matter with the RNC’s Contest Committee at the nominating  convention in Tampa this summer. There, as RNC Rules  Committee member John Ryder told NPR as early as November, a challenge could  well succeed, given the clarity of the rules that were adopted in August 2010 —  with the approval of Florida’s committee  members. …”

Gingrich Challenges Florida’s Winner-Take-All Delegate Scheme

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )

Liked it here?
Why not try sites on the blogroll...